In the new thriller "a sound of thunder" edward burns tries to stop time waves that threaten to erase humanity from existence...

Does this movie sound like a shark or what???

Seriously though this weekend is starting to stink out loud. I mean don't get me wrong, Nick Cannon's got a slammin' hot show on MTV, and that song where he thanks his mom for not aborting him during her pregnancy, thus by any logical deduction, of course he should have his own starring vehicle right?!?!. Especially one where he plays a street smart black guy/kid (how old is he?) who teaches a bunch of stiff, preppy, upper-class white students how to properly pronounce the word "booty." Who would have thought nick cannon had the maturity and charisma to develop such an original story outline on his own (he did too, check the story credits). This shit really sticks in my crawl.

I guess this is what I get for seeing Four Brothers.

Underclassmen ain't by itself this weekend either, Transporter 2 which while I badmouth I will probably end up seeing. I mean I saw the first one, and I really have to know what happens otherwise I won't believe in nothing no more. Then there's this sound of thunder a movie which nate has described to me in detail and maybe he can write about it in his blog. It's from the master of action who brought you Timecop, Sudden Death, and all the other piddling crap I wouldn't touch with a ten foot clown pole (even though I saw both of those movies in theatres). The premise is a rip off of that simpsons halloween special where homer goes back in time via his toaster to the land of dinosaurs and fucks up the future by ever so slightly changing the past. I bet this movie doesn't have ben kingsley getting his hand jammed in a toaster. Or does it?

However, if you've read nate's blog recently you are aware that I recently saw the constant gardner which somehow got dumped in the end of august and wilil probably find the same audience the island got, el zilcho. It's a shame too, it really is a fantastic movie, one of the best of this year I feel. It's the guy who directed city of god and the visual style is completely different yet just as compelling, this guy is a master of environments and locations, Africa breathes the same kind of life that the slums of rio de jeniro did in city. And the story unfolds like a really good book, plus the movie cares enough to explore as one character puts it in the film "how africa is constantly fucked over by the west" yet the movie is not a preachy poelmic either. I won't say anymore, check it out and you won't regret it. Well you might I mean I can't predict something like that, I'm not on trial here, leave me alone...

To close I will leave you with roger ebert's thoughts on underclassmen...excuse me underclassman

Did anyone at any time during the talks leading up to this film say, "Gee, guys, doesn't it seem like we've seen this a million times before?" Did anyone think to create an African-American character who was an individual and not a wiseass standup with street smarts? Was there ever an impulse to nudge the movie in the direction of originality and ambition? Or was everybody simply dazed by the fact that they were making a film and were therefore presumably filmmakers?